This comes courtesy of Ashwani Vasishth's excellent listserv
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
 
- Marc
 
----------------------------------
 

http://www.csmonito <http://www.csmonito/> r.com/2006/1228/p14s01-sten.html

Sci/Tech>Environment
from the December 28, 2006 edition

A grass-roots push for a 'low carbon diet'
     David Gershon's book guides readers through a series of behavioral
changes to reduce their 'carbon footprint.'

By Moises Velasquez-Manoff | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

Last June, David Gershon saw Al Gore's global warming documentary "An
Inconvenient Truth." The time was ripe, he realized, to finish an old
project.

In 2000, Mr. Gershon created a step-by-step program, à la Weight Watchers,
designed to reduce a person's carbon footprint. The idea received positive
reviews after a pilot program was run in Portland, Ore., but it eventually
fell by the wayside for lack of interest. "The world wasn't ready," says
Gershon, who heads the Empowerment Institute in Woodstock, N.Y., a
consulting organization that specializes in changing group behavior.

Illustration Omitted:
   CARBON CUTTER: David Gershon has written a step-by-step program to lower
one's carbon footprint.  COURTESY OF DAVID GERSHON

But since then, Americans witnessed the catastrophic fury of hurricane
Katrina, which, if nothing else, showed them what a major city looks like
underwater. A substantial body of evidence supporting the idea of
human-induced global warming accumulated. And, of course, Mr. Gore made his
movie. 

Attitudes toward global warming had shifted considerably. (Indeed, a recent
poll by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that nearly half of
Americans cited global warming as the No. 1 environmental concern; in 2003,
only one-fifth considered it that critical.)

Gershon put his nose to the grindstone, and a slim workbook titled "Low
Carbon Diet: A 30 Day Program to Lose 5,000 Pounds" was the result. Replete
with checklists and illustrations, the user-friendly guide is a serious
attempt at changing American energy-consumption behavior.

Although representing 4.5 percent of the world's population, the United
States contributes an estimated 25 percent of its greenhouse gases. Faced
with this fact and news reports of spring arriving earlier, winter arriving
later, and the Arctic melting, the subject of climate change has gone from
an abstract issue debated among scientists to something with apparently
measurable effects in daily life.

This is where Gershon's book comes in. The book guides participants through
a month-long process of behavioral change. Each participant calculates his
or her footprint - the average US household emits 55,000 pounds of carbon
dioxide annually, the book says - and then browses a list of
emissions-lowering actions. The goal is to reduce that amount bit by bit.
Replacing an incandescent bulb with a fluorescent, for example, counts for a
100-pound annual reduction. Purchasing an energy-efficient furnace counts
for 2,400 pounds. Just tuning up your existing furnace reduces your carbon
emissions by 300 pounds while insulating your warm air ducts lowers them by
800 pounds.

But the key to the program's success, say those who've participated, is in
forming a support group. People have good intentions, says Gershon, but
alone, they often lack the will to follow through. Like Weight Watchers or
Alcoholics Anonymous, the formation of a group encourages follow-through by
socially reinforcing the new, desired behavior.

"I think it's essential," says Nathaniel Charny, a New York lawyer who
participated in the recently completed testing phase of "Low Carbon Diet."
"Everybody's reinforcing the goals, and you're having frank discussions
about things."

And as Gershon sensed, the timing for a book offering day-to-day solutions
to an overwhelming global problem couldn't be better. Gore's group, The
Climate Project, which recently began training 1,000 volunteers to give
Gore's now-famous slide show, is handing out 600 copies of the book at the
end of the session.

Meanwhile, a handful of environmental and religious groups are recommending
the book to its members. The Regeneration Project, a San Francisco-based
interfaith ministry, has linked to the book on its main page. So have
Climate Solutions, a nonprofit group in Olympia, Wash., and the Vermont
chapter of Interfaith Power and Light (IPL), a nationwide organization
dedicated to "greening" congregations.

Tellingly, before the advent of Gershon's book, several congregations around
the country spontaneously embarked on carbon-reduction programs of their
own. The Michigan IPL worked out a deal with suppliers to sell compact
fluorescents to members at a lower price, and the Georgia IPL came up with a
program called "preparing for a new light" whereby for each candle lit
during holidays such as Hanukkah or Christmas Eve, participants change one
incandescent bulb in their home for a compact fluorescent. And three
congregants at St. Luke's in Cedar Falls, Iowa, started a comprehensive,
step-by-step program like Gershon's called "cool congregations."

This growing interest in measurably reducing one's footprint is a textbook
case of how new ideas spread throughout society, say sociologists, and how
new movements are born. In the abstract, if a problem is to be acted upon,
it has to be recognized as a problem, says Christopher Henke, assistant
professor of sociology at Colgate University in Hamilton, N.Y. Generally
speaking, problems are not recognized by a group until the leaders of that
group acknowledge them as such. In this sense, a problem matures and grows
up, says Mr. Henke, citing examples such as the civil rights movement in the
1960s and more recent antismoking campaigns. "It becomes something that we
take on as our own set of beliefs, our own moral issue," he says, "and then
it becomes a reality."

In the case of global warming and faith networks, the past year has seen
some important steps in this regard. In February, evangelical leaders around
the country broke with the Bush administration and, in an open letter called
the Evangelical Climate Initiative, said something had to be done. In
August, Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson said that, because of the summer
heat wave, he was a "convert" to the idea of human-driven global warming.

Once important figures in social groups adopt an idea, others in the group
are much more likely to to follow along. Then, movements spread and grow
along pre-existing social networks, says Bogdan Vasi, an assistant professor
at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs. "People
join a movement because their friends and relatives are involved," he says.
"If you hear that your friend is buying wind energy, you're more likely to
buy wind energy as well."

Indeed, preceding and perhaps contributing to the apparent demand for "Low
Carbon Diet" is a remarkable prior effort by The Regeneration Project and
the IPL. During October, the organizations showed "An Inconvenient Truth" to
4,000 congregations nationwide, reaching an estimated 500,000 people. "Those
were people who would not pay to see that movie," says the Rev. Sally
Bingham, executive director of the Regeneration Project. "But they got to go
see it for free." And the movie seems to have catalyzed the audience, she
says. After seeing the movie, audience members around the country asked
what, exactly, they could do about global warming. 

"There's kind of a critical mass now around global warming," says Wes
Sanders, vice chair of the Vermont IPL, which has already begun forming
teams around Gershon's book. "It's suddenly become sexy, so to speak."

Although it's unclear whether the book is a beneficiary of, or a contributor
to, a grass-roots movement, how ideas spread through groups is one of
Gershon's central preoccupations. He ascribes to a classic theory by
sociologist Everett Rogers on how innovations diffuse throughout a
community. New ideas begin with a small group of innovators and move on to
early adopters. They then pass on to early majority followed by a late
majority. Finally, the most hardheaded - the laggards - adopt the new idea.
Contrary to the oft-leveled criticism in environmental circles that by
preaching to the choir nothing gets accomplished, Gershon argues that one
should direct efforts at the group that's most receptive.

"Preach to the choir," says Gershon. "They'll sing loud enough to get
everyone to go into the church, or synagogue, or mosque."
A few footprint shrinkers

U.S. homes account for 8 percent of the world's emissions, with the average
household contributing 55,000 pounds of carbon dioxide annually, according
to author David Gershon. His "Low Carbon Diet" workbook makes dozens of
suggestions for reducing one's carbon footprint. Here are a few of his
book's recommendations and how much carbon he says participants can subtract
from their footprints by following through:

* Together, washers and dryers generate five pounds of carbon dioxide per
cycle. In warm or hot water loads, 90 percent of the required energy goes to
heat the water. Using cold water saves two pounds per load. Front-loading
washing machines cut the amount of water used in half. Drying clothes on a
clothesline further diminishes emissions. All in all, using cold water once
per week shrinks your carbon footprint by 275 pounds each year; not using
the dryer once a week gets you another 200. Replacing an old machine with an
Energy Star front-loading washer saves 500 pounds a year. 

* A 10-minute shower generates up to four pounds of CO2. A 5-minute shower
cuts that in half and a low-flow showerhead drops it further. In a
household, each person who reduces their shower to five minutes cuts
emissions by 175 pounds per year. A low-flow showerhead saves you another
250.

* Request to be removed from junk mail lists, which needlessly contribute to
waste. If you can reduce your weekly waste by 60 gallons, credit yourself
with 2,650 pounds yearly.


Copyright © 2006 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved.

***   NOTICE:  In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes only.
***


__._,_.___

  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mary Pettenger
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:22 AM
To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu
Subject: Vegan and Environmental Impact


Hello -
I'm seeking sources that discuss the environmental impact of
vegetarianism/vegan in comparison to consumption of meat. A student recently
asked about it and I vaguely remember some articles but cannot find them.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Mary Pettenger


Assistant Professor of Political Science 
Model United Nations Advisor 
Western Oregon University 
345 N Monmouth Ave 
Monmouth OR 97361 
(503)838-8301 (w) 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to